Study Avodah Zarah folio 12A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
place two pots on one stove, and yet the rabbis were not concerned and did not issue a prohibition with regard to the meat that was in the pot belonging to the Jew, despite the fact that forbidden food was in close proximity to the permitted food? Similarly, in this case as well, the rabbis were not
Abaye said: The rabbis were not concerned with regard to the possibility of eating the meat of an unslaughtered animal carcass. We do not say: Cooking in this manner is prohibited since perhaps the Jew will turn his face and at that moment the non-Jew will throw meat of an animal carcass into his
Rava said that there is a different explanation. The rabbis were not lenient in the face of a potential violation of Torah law, but were lenient in a case where it was rabbinic law that might be violated. As for R' Ḥanina’s comparison to pots in Tyre, there is no concern that a non-Jew might throw h
Rava concludes: Here too, in the corresponding situation, it is referring to a case where the coins were the non-Jew’s own money. The rabbis were not concerned about engaging in business transactions in the bazaar of Gaza, even due to the possibility that the Jew might be engaging in business with r
Rabba bar Ulla says: Even if the concern in the case of the pots applied only to the non-Jew cooking the Jew’s food, not the consumption of non-kosher meat, with regard to the bazaar the halakha would not be comparably lenient. The reason is the Jew need only stir the coals once to ensure that the